Jump to content

SwanderedTalent

Full Members
  • Posts

    6421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SwanderedTalent

  1. 2 hours ago, Thiefery said:

    I like Mullet but some of these other corn fans on twitter and FB.. they act as if the Big 12 would be LUCKY to have them back in the fold.

    I think the fortunes of the Big 12, Big Ten, and Nebraska would all be improved by the change. 

    Put Nebraska back into a Big 12 without divisions, where they can play Oklahoma the Saturday after Thanksgiving every year? That's an improvement. 

    But then I think having Texas A&M back in the Big 12, playing us on Thanksgiving, is also an improvement, because I'm a sucker for tradition. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 5 minutes ago, Eskimohorn said:

    If #1 could be addressed, then college football could work

    I wonder if the three P5 conferences that are trying to play are working this out. I know they're in some discussions but "we've got medical clearance to play" isn't the same as all 39 programs agreeing "and this is how we'll maintain safety". 

  3. 2 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

    You’re arguing medicine

    See, wrong. You are badly missing the point, probably because you're not really reading my posts. 

    I am not questioning your credentials or your experience, even though that's what you're spending half your time defending. I'm not claiming I'm particularly smart or that I think COVID is a "hoax", even though that's what you're spending the other half your time attacking. 

    You are not good at stating and defending positions. "I know lawyers" was a tongue in cheek way of pointing out the kind of fallacious reasoning your posts are filled with. You appeal to authority, you rely on anecdotal evidence and defend it by further appealing to authority, you bluster and insult, you even cite your bank account. 

    Do you really think your posts are persuasive? Because to me, they read like someone who knows he can't convince anyone of anything and takes disagreement as a personal affront. And this being the Internet, I know you're likely to turn right around (or were, before I predicted you might) and ask if I think my posts are persuasive, and that's easy: no. I don't. But I'm not trying to persuade-- I'm a skeptic. I'm participating just because I'm baffled there aren't more skeptics involved in the discussion.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 3
  4. 7 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

    If human life isn’t the metric you are considering than your confusion about this issue is rightly explained.

    Hold still for a minute, stop squirming. I said that what I would think if my life were at risk was meaningless in the context of discussing whether we should play college football, and it is. It's an appeal to emotion-- a hypothetical one at that-- and a solipsistic way of interpreting what we know pro and con. 

    If you want to say "well if it were me, I wouldn't play" and support individuals players choosing to sit out, that is perfectly reasonable. 

    If you want to say "if it were me, I wouldn't play, so no one should be allowed to play", then there's not really anything for you and I to discuss; that is an intractable difference of opinion. 

    If you want me to Internet this up and say "FUCK YOU FUCKER I'D FUCKING PLAY!!!!!" I can do that, but this is sort of a last-gasp attempt at having a nice discussion on Surly like the ones I'm having with js1 and ChiTownDoc.

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 2
  5. 1 minute ago, Js1 said:

    Players who spoke about We Are United and BLM - WE SHOULD LISTEN TO THEM

    Players who spoke up for We Want to Play -shut the fuck up, no one cares about your opinions

    see how that works? because that's an equally valid way of assessing people who were willing to accommodate the BLM related demands but don't care that the players want to play

    But in the interest of trying to debunk a "gotcha"-- I support the players right to organize. I don't agree with their conclusions all of the time, especially relating to the BLM political movement, but the players are the only group that don't automatically have a seat at the table and they need to do what they can to protect themselves until the model is properly changed.

  6. Just now, ChiTownDoc said:

    Lol.  No surprise you didn’t get that.  It was in response to me not working at an academic center vs private practice.  That’s something that can be a point of contention within medicine.  But you’re not even a fucking premed scrub but wanna call me out?  Hahaha 

    What does that have to do with me responding to being called a "hoax motherfucker" by saying "You don't know nearly as much as you tell yourself you do"  ?

    I'm not a "hoax motherfucker". You would know that if you spent any time outside of your little bubble of assumptions instead of trying to dunk on people. 

  7. 1 minute ago, 'stache said:

    If there was a 50-50 split, or even 80-20,

    What do you think the split is? Are you sure it's really what you think it is, like you're really hearing all sides of it? 

    Even if it was 80/20-- 20% is a huge margin of error for lack of a better term. But let's say "doctors" are 80% sure of something. How determined are you to act on 80% certainty? Do you think we should shut college football down if 80% of doctors think COVID poses a specifically heightened risk of myocarditis? Should we stop at college football...? Or should we shut down domestic airline service? 

     

  8. Just now, 'stache said:

    I like how they also always include "if you would just do your own independent research" meaning the cook "doctor" on youtube who finally said what you want to believe, so everyone else is wrong.

    see, I"m the opposite, I like people who think doctors can be divided into two categories: the ones who are right and agree with me, and the "cooks"

    because as with everything else in this country, there can't be a legitimate difference in conclusion after looking at facts, there's just the side that knows the right answer and their opponents, the mendacious and stupid

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  9. 3 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    But it is possible to want football to return without deliberately brushing aside the real risks to themselves and the 100's of coaches and support staff required to make football happen. Luckily, that seems to be the direction that we're currently heading.

    I'm not denying there are people out there like this, just that they're too busy calling into the Mark and Melinda show on KLBJ-590 AM to post in this thread.

  10. 8 hours ago, Superhero said:

    I really wish they had put Downtown Money Waster earlier in the album so I wouldn't have to skip over it everytime.

    Downtown Money Waster was on Amorica, instead of Dirty Hair Halo, Feathers, Exit, Nowhere Stairs, Fear Years, Title Song, etc

    one of their many weird, not good choices

  11. 5 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

    Yeah but crimsonlonghorn stayed at a holiday inn last night.  

    rich coming from someone who never met a piece of anecdotal evidence he didn't think conclusively proved his point

    you should change your screen name to IKnowAGuy-- ask one of the Lawyers You Know if you can do that

    • Haha 1
    • Fuck You 3
  12. 2 hours ago, Longboard Horn said:

    Since joining the Big Ten and running away from the Big 12, corn aggy is as follows:

    1. 3 head coaches

    2. 6 bowl appearances, 2 wins (2013 Gator, 2015 Foster Farms)

    3. 65-50 overall, 40-36 in Big Ten play

    4. ZERO CONFERENCE TITLES OR BCS/NY6 BOWL GAMES

    Everything started to turn to shit for them once Frank Solich left.

    Hope you guys are having fun!

    search on this site sucks or I'd find and re-post it, but I went through Nebraska's year-by-year results going back 50 years or so and the number of insane beatdowns they took prior to the 2000s was almost* nil, but became frequent from that point on. It went from "they never even give up 40 points" to "here's Colorado scoring 62, here's a 36-pt loss to KSU, here's Kansas scoring 76 and Wisconsin scoring 70 and Ohio State beating them by 59". 

  13. 19 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    "they're 20 years old, they're not going to die" takes are cringe-worthy.

    Stop cringing. Those takes mean they're 20 years old, they're not going to die from catching it, and they're likely to catch it whether they play college football or not. That last part is important. 

    The parents of Ohio State players signed a statement indicating they were in favor of playing. Obviously any conscientious objectors can sit the season out, but if the vast majority of players and their families want to play, the sport should continue. The players and parents have considered the risks.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
  14. 55 minutes ago, crimsonlonghorn said:

    Yes, I'll reiterate: Unless you are old or already have a preexisting condition, it's not that dangerous to healthy people under 65. I encourage you to do some research on your own. 

    I'm don't think it will kill any coaches and players, at least not beyond statistically significant level compared to the number of players and coaches who already die every season from other causes... which we already treat as an acceptable level by virtue of not canceling every season the first time someone dies. 

    on a prior page, one death was characterized as "outrageous"-- that's the standard you're trying to change

    as HAL said, this conversation can serve no further purpose

     

×
×
  • Create New...